Doug Wilson wrote:Comparing the facts of this incident against the actual wording of Rule 48.1, it appears that the NHL has not only made an inappropriate application of this rule but is trying to make an example out of a player who is being judged on past events, one who has changed his game dramatically this season and taken only six minor penalties in 39 games.

Doug Wilson wrote:Comparing the facts of this incident against the actual wording of Rule 48.1, it appears that the NHL has not only made an inappropriate application of this rulebut is trying to make an example out of a player who is being judged on past events, one who has changed his game dramatically this season and taken only six minor penalties in 39 games.

He may have gotten away without being fines except the part I bolded and colored.

Torres hasn't changed his game to stop targeting opponents' heads. Say he's reformed all you want, he is still trying to injure players in one of the most dangerous ways possible. A reformed player wouldn't be going after someone's head by trying to use a technicality by grazing a guy's shoulder first. He wanted to hit Stoll in the head and succeeded. Sounds like a really classy player who has made every attempt to change his game.

Cooke needs to be the poster-child for rehabilitation. Despite Torres' reduction in penalties this year, he's obviously learned nothing. I don't despise headshots quite as much as other people, but rules are rules and he's done nothing to change his game. Well deserved.

I think thats a hit that would definitely be looked at no matter who made that play. And I think its suspension worthy, but under the new CBA, if a first time offender was simply fined 10,000.00 and put on the black list for that hit I'd be okay with it I think. Being that its Torres, however, suspension definitely. The hitter has alot to do with it. His hit on Hossa last year was pretty damn egregious and will take a long time to "go away" in hockey circles.

The variable games thing (to the end of the round, or end of Conf Finals etc.) I got no problem with in the playoffs in general. Torres suspended till the end of the round.. I don't think theres a problem there. Its a punishment that fits the crime/player in this instance.

What he said was plain stupid. Torres can't stop himself from hitting guys high, and his career should be in a constant state of jeopardy until he proves that he can stop it. Hard to argue that he could have made this hit cleanly and chose to go for the big hit. That is not an arbitrary application of the rule.

Froggy wrote:my feeling is that it was a garbage suspension on cooke a couple years ago, but it makes me feel better now that at least they are treating all these major multiple offenders the same.

Cooke's elbow wasn't even worth discussing as a borderline dirty hit or glancing blow or even a hockey play.... So I don't understand the comparison, other than some feel both suspensions were too long.

Froggy wrote:my feeling is that it was a garbage suspension on cooke a couple years ago, but it makes me feel better now that at least they are treating all these major multiple offenders the same.

Cooke's elbow wasn't even worth discussing as a borderline dirty hit or glancing blow or even a hockey play.... So I don't understand the comparison, other than some feel both suspensions were too long.

in the sense that cooke got what amounted to 14 games for almost the exact same play that another player got suspended 2 games. The punishment wasn't over the play, it was the player. And it set a precedent that i was positive they wouldn't adhere to. I am happy to be proven wrong

Gotcha. Thanks for the clarification. Now if they'd be consistent in identifying offeneders so they can be reoffenders when they offend again. Otherwise it's just Matt and Raffi being the examples for the entire league.